Is Singapore under a dictatorship?

As an expert in political systems and governance, I can provide an insightful analysis of the political landscape in Singapore. It's important to clarify that the term "dictatorship" is often associated with a form of government where a single person or a small group exercises absolute authority over a country, typically without a legal framework or the consent of the governed. However, the application of such labels can be complex and should be done with a nuanced understanding of the political, social, and historical context.
Firstly, it's crucial to understand the historical evolution of Singapore's political system. The statement that Singapore was a "war-battered British port" forty years ago is a simplification of a more intricate history. Singapore was indeed part of the British Empire and later became a part of Malaysia, but it has always had a distinct identity and trajectory. The reference to Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew indicates the pivotal role he played in Singapore's development. Lee Kuan Yew was the first Prime Minister of Singapore and is often credited with transforming the country into a thriving economic powerhouse. His leadership style was indeed strong and decisive, but it is essential to note that he governed within a framework of laws and institutions that were established to guide the country's development.
The term "socialist dictator" as used in the provided content is a misnomer when applied to Singapore's political leadership. While Singapore has elements of state intervention in the economy, it is fundamentally a free-market economy with a strong emphasis on business-friendly policies, innovation, and international trade. The government's role has been more about strategic planning and investment rather than the nationalization of industries or the central planning typical of socialist economies.
Moreover, Singapore operates under a parliamentary system of government, which is a key feature of democratic governance. Citizens have the right to vote, and the government is accountable to the parliament. While the People's Action Party (PAP), which Lee Kuan Yew was a part of, has been the dominant political party since Singapore's independence, this does not equate to a dictatorship. The PAP has won numerous elections, and while critics argue about the nature of political competition, the fact remains that there is a process for the transfer of power through elections.
It's also important to consider the rule of law in Singapore. The country has a robust legal system that upholds the rights of individuals and businesses. There are checks and balances in place, and the judiciary is independent. This is a far cry from the arbitrary rule that is characteristic of dictatorships.
In terms of civil liberties and political freedoms, there is room for debate. Singapore has been criticized for restrictions on freedom of speech, assembly, and the press. However, these measures are often justified by the government as necessary for maintaining social stability and national security in a multi-ethnic and multi-religious society.
In conclusion, while Singapore has had a history of strongman leadership and has elements of state control, it does not fit the classical definition of a dictatorship. It is a complex and multifaceted society with a unique blend of authoritarian and democratic elements. The country's success in economic development and social stability is a testament to the effectiveness of its governance model, even if it diverges from the Western model of liberal democracy.

And at the head of this thriving free-market state is a clever, socialist dictator. Just forty years ago Singapore was a war-battered British port on an island off the southern tip of Malaysia. ... Singapore struggled along until 1965, when it became an independent nation with Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew in firm control.